Abstract

This Comment examines the relative merits of federal and state constitutional challenges to mandatory, nonbinding arbitration. Part II explores claims that arbitration deprives parties of their constitutional right to a jury trial. Part III examines due process challenges to arbitration. Part IV considers claims that arbitration violates the doctrine of separation of powers, while Part V explores claims that arbitration violates the Equal Protection Clause. Part VI considers whether parties who are ordered to arbitration are denied access to the courts. Finally, Part VII concludes that constitutional challenges against arbitration programs are unlikely to succeed because such programs generally do not place sufficiently heavy burdens upon litigants to violate the Constitution.